BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v. Untisz, 2013 Ohio 993

Appellant purchased real property in Geauga County on July 15, 2008 and signed a promissory note with a mortgage to American Midwest Mortgage Corp.
The mortgage was assigned to MERS and later to Bank of America, N.A. (successor by merger to BAC), with assignments recorded in 2008 and 2010 respectively.
BAC filed a foreclosure action on March 25, 2010 for default on the note and mortgage; Untisz answered pro se.
Appellant recorded several documents with the Geauga County Recorder and separately filed a quiet title action against BAC, MERS, and American Midwest.
The trial court consolidated the actions, granted summary judgment to BAC on both the foreclosure and quiet title actions, and ordered the appellant’s recorder documents removed from the public record.
Appellant appealed challenging capacity of MERS and the validity of the documents; the court affirmed the summary judgment for foreclose and quiet title.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether BAC proved foreclosure elements and standing	Untisz contends MERS lacks capacity and BAC lacks original note.	Untisz argues there is no real party in interest and note originality is lacking.	Summary judgment affirmed; BAC established ownership and default.
Whether the quiet title action was properly resolved	Untisz claimed documents recorded by him cloud title.	BAC showed the documents were not proper clouds and lacked consent of BAC.	Summary judgment affirmed; documents signed only by Untisz had no effect; quiet title denied.

Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (establishes Dresher burden for summary judgment)
Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (1977) (defines summary judgment standard)
Viock v. Stowe-Woodward Co., 13 Ohio App.3d 7 (1983) (standard for reviewing summary judgments on appeal)
Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (de novo review of summary judgment on appeal)